pvxfandomcom-20200214-history
User talk:PVX-Sandcrawler
Holy shit, two monk builds used RoF? Remove them both IMO, obvious violation of PW:WELL. -Auron's Obvious Sockpuppet 06:08, 26 September 2007 (CEST) Pfft I could care less if every build on here uses RoF, But are those builds not the same thing? There is a diffrent of 2 skills, 3 asumming you take a diffrent optional skill. And the only diffrence in attribute points is that the second one goes for a move evened out and the first maxes one. Sandcrawler 06:30, 26 September 2007 (CEST) This build? Really? - Krowman 06:17, 26 September 2007 (CEST) Maybe, I've posted so many who know? Sandcrawler 06:30, 26 September 2007 (CEST) :Well, you currently have only two contributions to the wiki. - Krowman 06:33, 26 September 2007 (CEST) ::Well, thats the one I posted up, should show 2 edits of it on there.... Sandcrawler 06:50, 26 September 2007 (CEST) :::Build was deleted, so any edits made to it don't show up on your Contributions special page. Nevertheless, that would give a total of 4 edits. Have the many other builds posted been similarly deleted? - Krowman 07:02, 26 September 2007 (CEST) ::::Hmm No, I haven't posted any other build, that was my first one...not exactly a nice greeting imo. I proly wont post any of my other builds. Sandcrawler 07:24, 26 September 2007 (CEST) :::::"Maybe, I've posted so many who know?" Tbh, you didn't set yourself up for a very warm welcome (see your talk page), but enjoy your time here anyways. - Krowman 07:36, 26 September 2007 (CEST) ::::::Well I figured you were being sarcastic, you did ask "This Build? Really?". Your a sysop and I figured you could look and see any pages that I have edited/have been edited regardless of their current deletion. Also before the gwwiki droped thier build section I posted around four of them there, and people would comment on them without even trying them. To me that is basicly what happened here, he marked it for deletion because it was like every other monk build, without trying it or commenting on it, and it says I can't remove it so I left it. Then I noticed my page was dleted without him commenting back, or any comments on it and wrote up my talk page. But i'm sure it has gotten more views then my build did because of the nature of it. Sandcrawler 07:49, 26 September 2007 (CEST) These guys nuke honestly bad builds pretty quickly, and sometimes are quick on the uptake to nuke builds they know will fail the vettins system (We have a lot of pages to cover and the best time to notice or make decisions is when it first shows up on the recent changes page). Your also running into the merging inconsistancy paradox that shows up from time to time on the wiki. A lot of the advanced people say this and that build work and function completely differently in High level GVG by switting out one skill (and with monking, it is true, I've experienced that) so they DO require different build vetting. Sometimes though you get a build with 5 skills differing from an original, and it is considered the same build, only rated as inferior superior as it performes the same role across the board in both high and low level events. Sometimes changing 1 skill moves the placement of the build (front, middle, backline) or how the build works (Ganker, interupter, prot/heal) and sometimes swapping out 5 different skills doesnt change any of these roles, but mearly slides the build up or down on the effectiveness scale. It's funky, but It's taken me a while to see the subtleties, but it's there. Shireensysop 08:23, 26 September 2007 (CEST)